Texas Vs Johnson Research Paper

This case then was put up to the national level and sent to the United States Supreme Court. There was great public attention because of media. Many groups involved themselves in either trying to support that Texas violated Johnson's first amendment right of freedom of expression, or tried to get a new amendment passed to the constitution stopping the burning of the United States’ flag. The final decision by the Supreme Court on June 21, 1989 was by a 5 – 4 vote, that the Texas court of criminal appeals violated Johnson's first amendment rights by prosecuting him under its law for burning a flag as a means of a peaceful political demonstration. The Supreme Court upheld this ruling, stating the flag burning was "expressive conduct" because it was an attempt to "convey a particularized message." This ruling invalidated flag protection laws in 48 states and the District of Columbia.

In the Texas v. Majority court case, the theme is tolerance is the driving force of the short read. The Supreme Court argued that we must be tolerant of Gregory Lee Johnson for his desecration of the American Flag as it is freedom of speech and would be unconstitutional to imprison him for exercising his first amendment freedoms. Another argument states that Johnson should have been tolerant of the United

Johnson was decided on June 21st of 1989 by the United States Supreme Court. The United States Supreme Court ruled that Gregory Lee Johnson's liberties and rights were violated, and that the burning of the U.S. flag was a constitutionally protected form of speech under the First Amendment. The court decided that flag burning was symbolic speech, and protected under the First Amendment. The opinion of the Court came down as a controversial 5–4 decision, with the majority opinion delivered by William J. Brennan, Jr. and Justices Thurgood Marshall, Harry Blackmun, Antonin Scalia, and Anthony Kennedy. Texas v. Johnson, was an important decision by the Supreme Court of the United States that revoked prohibitions on desecrating the American flag, enforced in 48 of the 50 states. Johnson’s actions, who were supported by the majority argued, that flag burning was explicitly symbolic speech, political in nature and could be expressed even if those disagreed with him, stated William Brennan. The majority also noted that freedom of speech protects actions that society may find very offensive, but society's outrage is not justification for suppressing Johnson’s actions, or symbolic speech. The dissenting opinion, which was written by Justice Stevens, and included Justices Rehnquist, White, Stevens, and O’ Connor, was that the flag's unique status as a symbol of national unity outweighed "symbolic speech" concerns, and thus, the government could lawfully prohibit flag

The United States is well-known for its principles of freedom and democracy, which is demonstrated through the First Amendment’s Free Speech Clause. Thus, American citizens can openly discuss political matters; criticize the President and his Cabinet on television, radio talk show or in the newspaper; or publicly protest against the government tax policy. However, Free Speech protection becomes debatable when some American citizens burn the nation’s flag to express their disagreement to the government. The act of burning the American Flag should be constitutionally protected under the First Amendment’s Free Speech Clause because the act is a symbolic expression that communicates an individual’s idea or opinion about his nation; and that

Johnson, 491 U.S. 397 (1989), was heard in the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. Johnson v. State, 755 S.W.2d 92 (Tex. Crim. App. 1988). The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals reversed the decision of the Texas Court of Appeals, Fifth District holding that “Johnson’s right to freedom of speech under the First Amendment of the United States Constitution was violated by the statute. States cannot pass laws which take away freedoms that are promised under the United States Constitution, and in passing section 42.09(a)(3), the state had deprived Johnson of his constitutional right to express his views about the government.” Johnson v. State, 706 S.W.2d 120 (Tex. App. – Dallas 1986). The Texas Court of Appeals, Fifth District had affirmed the decision of the Dallas County Criminal Court which found Mr. Johnson guilty of desecration of the American flag. State v. Johnson, No. CCR 84-46013-J (Crim. Ct. No. 7, Dallas Cnty. Tex. Dec. 13,

For example, when Gregory Lee Johnson burned an American flag in 1984, many Americans were outraged and blatantly critical of Johnson's actions, just as the author expresses his disagreement in the political cartoon (Doc 2). However, after the Supreme Court ruled that this action was symbolic speech, and therefore protected, some Americans began to reshape their thoughts. As written by the Supreme Court, "the Government may not prohibit the expression of an idea simply because society finds the idea itself offensive or disagreeable." This change in thinking for Americans has opened a door to new freedoms and more ways to express opinions in society, further protecting our rights to free speech. The Bill of Rights also leaves interpretation of many laws up the states, therefore protecting us from an all powerful national government.

People watched in shock; Protesters and none protesters circled around as Gregory Lee Johnson lit the American Flag on fire. Why would a man disrespect a symbol such as the American flag, that represents freedom, liberty and democracy? Was he protected by the constitution's first amendment? The Supreme Court answered all these questions we had by voting in favor of Johnson. Johnson's intentions were only political, and he as the freedom of speech. The Supreme Court was correct on this decision on letting Johnson go, since he was protected by his amendments, and no matter what the action was, if the amendment gives us the right, we should be entitled to our freedoms.

Everbody has there own reasons and opionions about everything. There are some that agree on things. Texas v johnson William j Brennan served on the supreme court from 1956 to 1990.[lines 3-4].The government had a interest in encouraging proper treatment to the flag.But it could or could not criminally punish a person for burning a flag.[lines4-5].This story texas v johnson relates to the quote because..some people agree that the flag should be treated right and with respect.Alot of people discriminate the things that went on with the flag.

When the U.S. declared it is independence from the British the American flag became a symbol of freedom. Today's flag has fifty stars representing each state and thirteen stripes representing the 13 colonies, and it is an example of Americans’ values, hope and liberty. On August 22, 1984, Gregory Lee Johnson, a political activist, and other activist went on a march in Dallas Texas during the Republican National Convention. They went to protest the policies of the Reagan administration. When they arrived the Dallas City Hall Johnson doused an American flag with kerosene, and he set it on fire while the other people shouted, “American, the red, white, and blue, we spit on you was reported by Texas v. Johnson article.” There are several significant aspects in the case of Johnson v Texas including the Johnson’s conviction in the Dallas Country Criminal Court, Johnson’s appeal to the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals and the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court.

For instance, in the two passages Texas v. Johnson and American Flag Stands for Tolerance, the hardship of Gregory Lee Johnson is explained. He burned an American Flag as a way of expressing his opinion. First Amendment protects the people’s freedom of

In 1984 in front of the Dallas City Hall during the Republican National Convention, respondent Gregory Lee Johnson participated in a political demonstration to protest the policies of the Reagan administrations and some Dallas-bound corporations. Johnson proceeded with burning an American flag in protest against the policies, where Reagan sought to stimulate the economy with large tax cuts. Johnson was tried and convicted, under Texas law, of the desecration of a venerated object. The State Court of Appeals affirmed the actions, until the case advanced to the Supreme Court after the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals reversed the conviction, holding that the State (consistent with the First Amendment) could not punish Johnson

The flag of the United States is our national symbol and our most important symbol of all; it symbolizes our nation’s strength and pride. Due to its high values and symbolism, by 1932, forty-eight states had adopted the flag desecration laws to legally protect and restrict desecration of the flag of the United States. However, these flag desecration laws only lasted until 1989, because in 1989, in the Texas v Johnson case, the United States Supreme Court recognized that flag desecration as a form of symbolic political speech that is constitutionally protected by First Amendment and agreed that the “government may not prohibit the expression of an idea simply because society finds the idea itself offensive or disagreeable”( ).

Texas v. Johnson (No. 88-155). Argued: March 21, 1989. Decided: June 21, 1989 In 1984 the Republican National Convention was held in Dallas, Texas. While there, a group of protesters, opposed to President Reagan's reelection, burned an American flag. Specifically, Greg Johnson was seen dousing the flag with kerosene and lighting it on fire. Johnson was arrested under a Texas flag desecration law. He was convicted and sentenced to one year in jail and fined $2000. The State Court of Appeals affirmed but the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals reversed the decision.

The United States Supreme Court found Texas’s flag desecration law unconstitutional during the Johnson verses Texas case. During the 1984 Republican National Convention, Johnson took part in a “political demonstration to protest the policies of the Reagan administration and some Dallas-based corporations” (Texas v Johnson). Johnson burned an American flag after he marched through the streets, while other protesters chanted. No one was physically injured or in danger of injury, although several witnesses were seriously offended by the flag burning. Johnson was convicted of “…desecration of a venerated object in violation of a Texas statute” (Texas v Johnson). The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals acquitted the violation because under the First Amendment, flag burning is expressive conduct; therefore, he could not be punished. The court concluded that the State could not criminally restrict flag desecration in order to preserve the flag as a symbol of national unity. Also, “The government may not prohibit the verbal or nonverbal expression of an idea merely because society finds the idea offensive or disagreeable, even when our flag is involved” (Texas v Johnson). It is unconstitutional to limit our rights simply because someone finds our actions disrespectful. A state may not hold its own view of the flag nor prohibit expressive

Today, the Constitution is still used as the highest form of validity for every law the United States has. The most important of the six basic principles have upheld American values: judicial review, checks and balances, and federalism. Judicial review was established in 1803 in the court case Marbury v. Madison. This court case came about after the election of Thomas Jefferson in 1800. The president before him, John Adams, had hastily appointed judges and justices of the Federalist party before Jefferson took office and had the chance to appoint Democratic-Republican judges. After appointments had been failed to be delivered, Marbury appealed to the Supreme Court and thus the case is now a precedent for hearings needing review of the justices. The Supreme Court had to get involved during the case of Plessy v. Ferguson after conflicting state laws over racial segregation. They ruled that it would be legal to have “separate but equal” public facilities. This completely shaped the course of American history especially during the 1950’s and the Civil Rights movement. This case was later reevaluated and overturned by the court case Brown v. Board of Education. Also, in 1966 the Miranda v. Arizona case used judicial review after Ernesto Miranda was not made